Since 5 January, François Georges has been aware that he is no longer the Director of ProActif. Allegations of aggressive behaviour have surfaced since then, with both parties presenting their cases during Thursday’s summary proceedings. The judge presiding over the case will determine whether the dismissal by the company’s president constitutes a valid termination. Georges’ lawyer refutes this claim, pointing out numerous errors in “form and foundation.”
During Thursday’s proceedings, the court examined the dismissal for the first time, considering it will take effect in mid-April, just over two weeks from now. At that point, Georges will be required to register with the National Employment Agency (ADEM) to apply for unemployment benefits. However, according to Georges and his lawyer Romain Adam, such action may not be necessary. They argue that the dismissal lacked approval from the Administrative Board and therefore should be deemed invalid. Georges’ lawyer contends that the entire situation is marred by procedural and substantive errors, prompting their appeal to the court to nullify the dismissal.
ProActif’s lawyer countered that neither the judge nor the summary proceedings were competent in this case. According to their argument, there was no “manifestly unlawful breach” nor was the situation black and white. Instead, they emphasised the need to address the underlying issues rather than relying on summary proceedings, which they deemed unsuitable for such a task. Additionally, they highlighted that the decision to terminate the contract was not solely made by the President of ProActif. Another board member also signed off on the decision and was responsible for informing the individual of their dismissal in writing.
In summary, one side claims that no proper protocols were followed, alleging a lack of adherence to principles of good governance, and disputing the validity of the dismissal. Conversely, the opposing argument asserts that the dismissal was executed correctly and stands valid. They contend that the judge overseeing the summary proceedings lacked the authority to conduct an investigation, thus rendering the court without jurisdiction, according to this perspective.
Full report by RTL Télé (in Luxembourgish)
Dismissal drama: Legal battle ensues as François Georges contests ProActif termination
Employment initiative: ProActif director sacked amidst misconduct allegations
